GIGAFAN99
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,487
|
Post by GIGAFAN99 on Feb 25, 2007 17:10:51 GMT -5
if we don't lose again, we'll move ahead of those crappy teams. those lists are made based on the national polls, which as we all know are meaningless. the committee pays no attention to them. I had to laugh when "Jimmy D" (Dykes?) shared with Brad Nessler and viewers his breakdown of the Big East NCAA resumes during their ABC broadcast of Marquette-Notre Dame. To be cute he tried to do it like seating categories. Get this, he had Pitt as the only "first class" team and Georgetown in "business class." It was so blatently idiotic that Nessler called him on it: "sounds to me like maybe Georgetown and Pitt just swapped seats" and Jimmy D didn't really know what to say. Say what you will about Seth Davis, but I'd probably take his projections over anybody of the color analysts that were on TV yesterday (Bob Wenzel, Gminski, "Jimmy D", etc.) So Seth Davis says Memphis is "likely a #2, definitely no lower than a #3." Everyone has been brainwashed by Calipari. Apparently it will be a surprise to everyone when a team whose best road win is by one point in OT @gonzaga without their starting forward finds itself as a #6 seed.
|
|
thornski
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 155
|
Post by thornski on Feb 25, 2007 17:52:51 GMT -5
The only other remotely quality wins that Memphis has other than to Heytvelt-less Gonzaga are at home to Kentucky and Oklahoma (pretty bad when you have to stretch to say that oklahoma is a 'quality' win)...if they get higher than a 3 it's a total joke
|
|
|
Post by guhoyasfan36 on Feb 25, 2007 18:01:23 GMT -5
The only thing Memphis has going for them is although they haven't beaten anyone they haven't lost many games either. Only losses coming to Gtech, Tenn, and Zona. Just what happens when have a weak conference.
|
|
GUJook97
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,445
|
Post by GUJook97 on Feb 25, 2007 18:16:38 GMT -5
To be fair, the media is talking about potential #1 seeds based on how things stand right now and what would be practical in the last two weeks. While it is not out of the realm for us to win 16 in a row, it's hard to really predict that. If you phrased the question, "if Gtown wins out, would they be a #1," I think a lot of analyst's would say yes.
|
|
KHoyaNYC
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,900
|
Post by KHoyaNYC on Feb 25, 2007 18:17:03 GMT -5
Watching Louisiville-UConn and the "other possible #1 seeds" were A&M, Kansas, and Memphis OK, I'm officially a little ticked off here. The Hoyas have more top 50 wins (6) than all three of those teams (4, 4, and ONE respectively). They have no losses outside the top 50 (all those teams do). Their RPIs are not appreciably better (Hoyas at 16 versus 13, 15, and 9 for those three). Plus, the Hoyas have the most true road wins of any of those teams (9). Maybe it's SOS? Nope, those three are 57, 65, and 71 respectively. The Hoyas check in at #31. I don't think the Hoyas are a #1 seed right now of course, but I can't see how these three teams are any closer than the Hoyas. The ONLY thing they all have in common is they all have fewer overall losses than the Hoyas (4, 4, and 3). No offense to those teams but big deal considering the rest of their resumes. I don't think we're giving the NCAA committee enough credit here. If the committee does its job correctly, none of the teams CBS mentioned should be given #1 seeds based on their resumes right now and the Hoyas should be no worse than a #2. I also noted during yesterday's broadcast that Seth Davis thought Depaul was in the tourney and WVU was out. I know some people think WVU is garbage, but they deserve to dance if they don't impolde in the BE tourney (I think they can pick off Pitt tomorrow, but we'll see). Nevertheless, I can't see any strong case being made for Depaul. So, I guess what I am saying is trust the committee and not the media. They tend to reward "hot" teams with higher seeds (remember Syracuse last year?), and no one is hotter right now than us. Oh, and I disagree in part about Memphis. Its true that they don't have any impressive wins, but its not like they have been squeaking by the competition this year (Gonzaga excepted, but I don't think that is a big deal). They've been pretty much cruising past every team they play. In other words, they are taking care of business against inferior teams like they should.
|
|
GUJook97
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,445
|
Post by GUJook97 on Feb 25, 2007 18:22:09 GMT -5
The way i see it is: zero losses = 1 seed; 1 more loss = 2 seed; two more losses = 3 seed.
|
|
Big Dog
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,912
|
Post by Big Dog on Feb 25, 2007 18:27:44 GMT -5
Memphis will be no higher than a 3. don't they also seem primed for a shocking upset in the CUSA tourney?
just remember how the committee came through with GW getting that low seed last year despite being AP poll top five or whatever going into the tourney. they will treat Memphis the same way.
|
|
Madgesdiq
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,434
|
Post by Madgesdiq on Feb 25, 2007 18:28:23 GMT -5
There wasn't 1 minute of the Wisconsin-Ohio St. game when I felt that I was watching the potential national champion. No way they should both get a #1 seed. Hopefully, the tournament seeding committee learned something from the premature media coronation of Ohio St. and Michigan as the clear best 2 BCS football teams.
|
|
miamihoya
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 698
|
Post by miamihoya on Feb 25, 2007 18:51:16 GMT -5
The only thing Memphis has going for them is although they haven't beaten anyone they haven't lost many games either. Only losses coming to Gtech, Tenn, and Zona. Just what happens when have a weak conference. all of which are bubble teams...so those arent exactly "quality" losses either. There strength of schedule stands at 70..thats not exactly worthy of a top-2 seed
|
|
KHoyaNYC
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,900
|
Post by KHoyaNYC on Feb 25, 2007 18:59:03 GMT -5
Memphis desn't deserve a #1, and probably not a #2, but they are no worse than a #3 seed. Tought to argue with them not being one of the top 12 teams in the country.
|
|
GIGAFAN99
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,487
|
Post by GIGAFAN99 on Feb 25, 2007 19:05:03 GMT -5
Watching Louisiville-UConn and the "other possible #1 seeds" were A&M, Kansas, and Memphis OK, I'm officially a little ticked off here. The Hoyas have more top 50 wins (6) than all three of those teams (4, 4, and ONE respectively). They have no losses outside the top 50 (all those teams do). Their RPIs are not appreciably better (Hoyas at 16 versus 13, 15, and 9 for those three). Plus, the Hoyas have the most true road wins of any of those teams (9). Maybe it's SOS? Nope, those three are 57, 65, and 71 respectively. The Hoyas check in at #31. I don't think the Hoyas are a #1 seed right now of course, but I can't see how these three teams are any closer than the Hoyas. The ONLY thing they all have in common is they all have fewer overall losses than the Hoyas (4, 4, and 3). No offense to those teams but big deal considering the rest of their resumes. I don't think we're giving the NCAA committee enough credit here. If the committee does its job correctly, none of the teams CBS mentioned should be given #1 seeds based on their resumes right now and the Hoyas should be no worse than a #2. I also noted during yesterday's broadcast that Seth Davis thought Depaul was in the tourney and WVU was out. I know some people think WVU is garbage, but they deserve to dance if they don't impolde in the BE tourney (I think they can pick off Pitt tomorrow, but we'll see). Nevertheless, I can't see any strong case being made for Depaul. So, I guess what I am saying is trust the committee and not the media. They tend to reward "hot" teams with higher seeds (remember Syracuse last year?), and no one is hotter right now than us. Oh, and I disagree in part about Memphis. Its true that they don't have any impressive wins, but its not like they have been squeaking by the competition this year (Gonzaga excepted, but I don't think that is a big deal). They've been pretty much cruising past every team they play. In other words, they are taking care of business against inferior teams like they should. But what does that mean really? They're beating inferior teams and by inferior, I mean not even NIT teams. It's one thing to say they're taking care of even decent teams, but they aren't. I think the fact that they squeaked by Gonzaga IS a big deal. Why? Because the Zags are far and away the best team they've played since Christmas and they barely escaped. Bottom line, they've played six teams that are even in the tournament discussion (GA Tech, Kentucky, Tennessee, Ole Miss, Arizona, and Gonzaga). Three of those are out if the season ended today and Memphis is 2-1 versus those teams and 1-2 versus teams that are in. Those are the results you expect from and 8-9 seed, not a 2-3. WVU needs to beat Pitt and I definitely think they can. Right now their best road win is Seton Hall and that's killing them. They're in the same boat as 'Cuse is against us.
|
|
Madgesdiq
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,434
|
Post by Madgesdiq on Feb 25, 2007 19:13:13 GMT -5
Memphis desn't deserve a #1, and probably not a #2, but they are no worse than a #3 seed. Tought to argue with them not being one of the top 12 teams in the country. When you only have 1 top 50 RPI win, and that against a mid-major, I am not sure it's that tough to argue. I'd seed them #5.
|
|
GIGAFAN99
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,487
|
Post by GIGAFAN99 on Feb 25, 2007 19:24:36 GMT -5
Memphis desn't deserve a #1, and probably not a #2, but they are no worse than a #3 seed. Tought to argue with them not being one of the top 12 teams in the country. When you only have 1 top 50 RPI win, and that against a mid-major, I am not sure it's that tough to argue. I'd seed them #5. Yeah I agree. Why is it so hard to argue that Memphis isn't a three seed? Is it because of their record? OK, I'll say Winthrop is a #3 seed. Tough to argue with me. They're 25-4, and undefeated and untested in a crappy conference. All their losses are good (actually better than Memphis' with UNC, Maryland, Wisconsin, and A & M) and they actually went on the road to beat two teams that will very likely get at-large bids (Missouri St. and Old Dominion). So it's settled, Winthrop is a #3 seed.
|
|
KHoyaNYC
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,900
|
Post by KHoyaNYC on Feb 25, 2007 19:32:49 GMT -5
Seriously now. Look, I think the RPI as a measuring stick for teams is woefully inadequate, but it is what the NCAA uses, so we're stuck with it. Memphis has 3 losses (none bad) and an RPI of 9. Winthrop's RPI is 64.
You want to argue about Memphis' SOS? Fine, 71 is pretty bad. But C-USA is pretty bad too. Memphis' non-conference strength of schedule is a solid 24. Oh and by the way Georgetown's non conference SOS is 111.
Want to use the "last 10 games" criteria? Fine. Memphis is 10-0.
Any way you slice it, Memphis is not getting lower than a #3 seed. Not with the critieria the NCAA uses.
|
|
|
Post by NickSixers on Feb 25, 2007 19:40:58 GMT -5
Another one bites the dust: Maryland beats UNC. I hate to say it, but I was pulling for UNC.
|
|
GIGAFAN99
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,487
|
Post by GIGAFAN99 on Feb 25, 2007 19:53:09 GMT -5
Seriously now. Look, I think the RPI as a measuring stick for teams is woefully inadequate, but it is what the NCAA uses, so we're stuck with it. Memphis has 3 losses (none bad) and an RPI of 9. Winthrop's RPI is 64. You want to argue about Memphis' SOS? Fine, 71 is pretty bad. But C-USA is pretty bad too. Memphis' non-conference strength of schedule is a solid 24. Oh and by the way Georgetown's non conference SOS is 111. Want to use the "last 10 games" criteria? Fine. Memphis is 10-0. Any way you slice it, Memphis is not getting lower than a #3 seed. Not with the critieria the NCAA uses. By pure RPI, they're a #3 seed. So you're saying that their RPI is either dead on or they're BETTER than their RPI? The only way you didn't slice it is by a tiny little part of the selection committee's process called who you BEAT. Memphis hasn't beaten anybody except another mathematical anomaly in #10 Kentucky. If they get a "Gonzaga #3" I'll be surprised but I will happily pick them to lose to anyone in the second round.
|
|
miamihoya
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 698
|
Post by miamihoya on Feb 25, 2007 19:55:49 GMT -5
Seriously now. Look, I think the RPI as a measuring stick for teams is woefully inadequate, but it is what the NCAA uses, so we're stuck with it. Memphis has 3 losses (none bad) and an RPI of 9. Winthrop's RPI is 64. You want to argue about Memphis' SOS? Fine, 71 is pretty bad. But C-USA is pretty bad too. Memphis' non-conference strength of schedule is a solid 24. Oh and by the way Georgetown's non conference SOS is 111. Want to use the "last 10 games" criteria? Fine. Memphis is 10-0. Any way you slice it, Memphis is not getting lower than a #3 seed. Not with the critieria the NCAA uses. By those standards, is Southern Illinois a #1 seed? Their RPI is 4 (as opposed to Memphis #9), they are 7-2 versus the top 50 (memphis is 1-3), they have the 37th toughest S.O.S. (as opposed to 70th) and they have won 11 straight in a conference vastly superior to C-USA. Sometimes its too easy to get caught up in all those numbers. The truth is that the commitee looks at many different things in seeding a team, and I believe they will see Memphis for what it is: a good mid-major team that has a slightly inflated record because of where it plays. Are they as overrated as GW was last year? No. But they also arent one of the top 8 teams in the country and would struggle in any major conference.
|
|
KHoyaNYC
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,900
|
Post by KHoyaNYC on Feb 25, 2007 20:07:47 GMT -5
Seriously now. Look, I think the RPI as a measuring stick for teams is woefully inadequate, but it is what the NCAA uses, so we're stuck with it. Memphis has 3 losses (none bad) and an RPI of 9. Winthrop's RPI is 64. You want to argue about Memphis' SOS? Fine, 71 is pretty bad. But C-USA is pretty bad too. Memphis' non-conference strength of schedule is a solid 24. Oh and by the way Georgetown's non conference SOS is 111. Want to use the "last 10 games" criteria? Fine. Memphis is 10-0. Any way you slice it, Memphis is not getting lower than a #3 seed. Not with the critieria the NCAA uses. By pure RPI, they're a #3 seed. So you're saying that their RPI is either dead on or they're BETTER than their RPI? The only way you didn't slice it is by a tiny little part of the selection committee's process called who you BEAT. Memphis hasn't beaten anybody except another mathematical anomaly in #10 Kentucky. If they get a "Gonzaga #3" I'll be surprised but I will happily pick them to lose to anyone in the second round. Why would you be surprised? I'm just using the same criteria the NCAA does. It's not just pure RPI. But if Memphis is so bad, or the teams they beat so unimpressive, why is their RPI #9? It's also wins and losses, SOS and last 10 games too. Based on those criteria, I would be shocked if Memphis got lower than a #3 seed right now. Southern Illinois I think will get a #3 too.
|
|
GIGAFAN99
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,487
|
Post by GIGAFAN99 on Feb 25, 2007 20:30:20 GMT -5
By pure RPI, they're a #3 seed. So you're saying that their RPI is either dead on or they're BETTER than their RPI? The only way you didn't slice it is by a tiny little part of the selection committee's process called who you BEAT. Memphis hasn't beaten anybody except another mathematical anomaly in #10 Kentucky. If they get a "Gonzaga #3" I'll be surprised but I will happily pick them to lose to anyone in the second round. Why would you be surprised? I'm just using the same criteria the NCAA does. It's not just pure RPI. But if Memphis is so bad, or the teams they beat so unimpressive, why is their RPI #9? It's also wins and losses, SOS and last 10 games too. Based on those criteria, I would be shocked if Memphis got lower than a #3 seed right now. Southern Illinois I think will get a #3 too. Gonzaga had to lobby for years for that #3 seed. They usually were stuck in th 6-8 range. That's why I'd be surprised. The reason their RPI is #9 is because their RPI ranks #9. That sounds like a BS answer but that's true. It doesn't mean they are the 9th best team in the nation, just that the formula has worked out in a way that they have the ninth best RPI. It's not a good argument to say, "well if they're so much worse than their RPI why is their RPI so good?" I mean, that's the whole point. It's not perfect which is why you get Nevada ranking #20 without a win over any team that could even sniff an at-large bid or even deeper in the RPI, Davidson at #63 without a top 100 win. I just think that the committee will be unimpressed by Memphis merely avoiding bad losses all year versus a team that has actually had to beat quality opponents.
|
|
|
Post by reggie on Feb 25, 2007 21:15:41 GMT -5
The Big East has the most teams in the top 25, and we've beaten all of them, and if we win out i dont think there's any way we're not a 1 seed.
|
|